Gross overcrowding on the 23:05 Waterloo to Poole service

[Carlisle]

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

It just goes to show that there is nothing (really) new in the world of railways.

I get the impression from reading these posts that leasing modern trains especially the way SWT do has put a whole extra layer of quite significant costs in the system and ultimately the old fashion way of simply buying trains will ultimately be found to prove to be the best value ,like that saying "The best ideas are often the simplest"

 

[A-driver]

Well get one!!!

Well that wasn't really worth the effort it took you to post was it?!

That response did nothing to help the thread and you have clearly ignored the rest of the posts explaining why they can't just get an extra driver...cost. And this is the real world where, like it or not, everything comes down to cost.

Think before you post, you are starting to come across as nothing more than yet another troll.

 

[Domh245]

I get the impression from reading these posts that leasing modern trains especially the way SWT do has put a whole extra layer of quite significant costs in the system and ultimately the old fashion way of simply buying trains will ultimately be found to prove to be the best value ,like that saying "The best ideas are often the simplest"

I think the main problem with that is that modern trains are expensive, and so for a TOC like SWT, to replace a large fleet of slam-doors by buying even more expensive desiros, would probably cost most of their income for their contractual period. Imagine if stagecoach spent billions of pounds on a new fleet, only to be told after 5 years "Sorry but your time is up. First group are now going to have a go at running the franchise" They would either:
a) sell first group their fleet of desiros for the same amount or even more than they bought them for (bankrupting first group)
b) Move their fleet of desiros to another one of their franchises (unlikely, unless 3rd rail springs up around nottingham)
c) Be made to surrender their trains to first group by the government, loosing their billions of pounds of investment instantly.

In order for that to work, you'd need to have long term contracts (about the lifetime of the stock!)

 

[Carlisle]

I think the main problem with that is that modern trains are expensive, and so for a TOC like SWT, to replace a large fleet of slam-doors by buying even more expensive desiros, would probably cost most of their income for their contractual period. Imagine if stagecoach spent billions of pounds on a new fleet, only to be told after 5 years "Sorry but your time is up. First group are now going to have a go at running the franchise" They would either:
a) sell first group their fleet of desiros for the same amount or even more than they bought them for (bankrupting first group)
b) Move their fleet of desiros to another one of their franchises (unlikely, unless 3rd rail springs up around nottingham)
c) Be made to surrender their trains to first group by the government, loosing their billions of pounds of investment instantly.

In order for that to work, you'd need to have long term contracts (about the lifetime of the stock!)

Cheers yes I appreciate that the leasing method is really the only option to buy new trains with the system we have now ,I was thinking hypothetically in the future if a government decides to demand significant savings from the railways totally changes the way we run them

 

[martybabes]

Well that wasn't really worth the effort it took you to post was it?!

That response did nothing to help the thread and you have clearly ignored the rest of the posts explaining why they can't just get an extra driver...cost. And this is the real world where, like it or not, everything comes down to cost.

Think before you post, you are starting to come across as nothing more than yet another troll.

But it's not "can't" is it? It's wont.
Criticism of what is transparently a problem where there is no desire to address a solution is not trolling. I am pleased to say that while I was working, I adopted a solution-based approach to problems rather than, as is evident here, a litany of excuses and hurdles - a stark unwillingness, even - to consider how things can be overcome, and they could be as we saw earlier in the post.

Insulting those of us who are critical of situations is not only childish but does your industry no favours at all.

 

[Muzer]

But it's not "can't" is it? It's wont.
Criticism of what is transparently a problem where there is no desire to address a solution is not trolling. I am pleased to say that while I was working, I adopted a solution-based approach to problems rather than, as is evident here, a litany of excuses and hurdles - a stark unwillingness, even - to consider how things can be overcome, and they could be as we saw earlier in the post.

Insulting those of us who are critical of situations is not only childish but does your industry no favours at all.

But you still haven't suggested where the money is coming from. I'm all for the DfT encouraging TOCs financially to lengthen trains in the late evenings when they're busiest. But this isn't going to happen without some incentive to do it from the government, for example.

 

[A-driver]

But it's not "can't" is it? It's wont.
Criticism of what is transparently a problem where there is no desire to address a solution is not trolling. I am pleased to say that while I was working, I adopted a solution-based approach to problems rather than, as is evident here, a litany of excuses and hurdles - a stark unwillingness, even - to consider how things can be overcome, and they could be as we saw earlier in the post.

Insulting those of us who are critical of situations is not only childish but does your industry no favours at all.

Ok, so where does the extra money come from to pay for extra drivers? It's all been explained here, you just havnt read the thread or have ignored the explanations so that you an have your argument.

 

[MCR247]

At the end of the day, lets say SWT solved the overcrowding of late night services from Dec 14 by having a load of complex move requiring more paths and staff etc, would we then not have a thread entitled "Waste of space on the 2305 Waterloo - Poole train" or "2305 Waterloo - Poole: Train always empty but no cheap advances?!" because it is a 10 car 444 now, but it isn't that full anymore because SWT don't release the cheapest advance fares since the service is now more expensive to run :roll:

 

[martybabes]

But you still haven't suggested where the money is coming from.

And why is it up to me to suggest a solution to the problem or where the money's coming from? You're in the industry - you do it.

If you came to me with a problem, I would be severely criticised by my professional body if I left it to you to come up with the answer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ok, so where does the extra money come from to pay for extra drivers?

Ditto

 

[A-driver]

And why is it up to me to suggest a solution to the problem or where the money's coming from? You're in the industry - you do it.

If you came to me with a problem, I would be severely criticised by my professional body if I left it to you to come up with the answer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Ditto

You are arguing something but ignoring the facts of the matter which is that it comes down to cost. You seem to be yet another poster in a fantasy world with no real idea of the real world which we are actually in. Getting extra drivers and paths is expensive and that is why this us run as a 5 car.

SWT wouldn't do it if they had a choice but they are a business and as such their priority is making money- same as any company in any industry. They wouldn't bother running the network if they couldn't make money from it.

 

[martybabes]

you just havnt read the thread or have ignored the explanations so that you an have your argument.

These "explanations" are reasons why you don't do it not why you can't.

It would be more honest if the industry said that it was not prepared to do it rather than hide behind facile explanations of why it can't. And then, maybe, not only would the public be less critical of the railway, but also the hard-working majority of those working within it would not have to offer shallow excuses while hiding behind the company mantra.

 

[Muzer]

And why is it up to me to suggest a solution to the problem or where the money's coming from? You're in the industry - you do it.

No I'm not

But why should the industry care? They're an industry, not a public service. If we still had British Rail, you'd have a point. But as it is, if we want to do anything for the public good, the DfT need to be the ones coughing up the money to do so, perhaps by suggestion of SWT next time the franchise comes up for renewal (ie as part of their franchise bid).

It's what you get when you privatise what is obviously a public service. It still works well enough in most cases, but perhaps in edge cases/cases that arise quicker than the franchise process/cases that are not recognised as well in contracts, it can fall down slightly.

 

[Eagle]

And why is it up to me to suggest a solution to the problem?

It isn't up to you. But you keep bemoaning the lack of a solution without offering any reasonable solution of your own. Stop doing that, it's idiotic.

 

[jon91]

We're supposed to find drivers for these extra services down the back of the sofa. Shame on us for not looking hard enough...

It's easy enough to demand extra drivers and to label railway staff as having a 'can't do won't do' attitude but by doing so you're only making a fool of yourself.

 

[infobleep]

If there was a profit to bed made would south west trains provide more rolling stock? Arrive we saying additional coaches is not profitable enough.

Out of interest who is paying for the lengthening of trains to 10 cars on suburban routes? Is that simply a profitable thing to do? For example longer trains so more will travel and south west trains make a bigger profit.

Sent from my HUAWEI U8815 using Tapatalk

 

[455driver]

Out of interest who is paying for the lengthening of trains to 10 cars on suburban routes? Is that simply a profitable thing to do? For example longer trains so more will travel and south west trains make a bigger profit.

Sent from my HUAWEI U8815 using Tapatalk

I will give you a clue, it isnt SWT!

Sent from my keyboard using my fingers without the aid of predictive text!

 

[bb21]

These "explanations" are reasons why you don't do it not why you can't.

In case you missed it, he has made it very clear that money is an unavoidable issue. It is not going to fall out of the sky.

Now if you have a solution for it, then tell us. If not, then accept it. :roll:

 

[A-driver]

These "explanations" are reasons why you don't do it not why you can't.

It would be more honest if the industry said that it was not prepared to do it rather than hide behind facile explanations of why it can't. And then, maybe, not only would the public be less critical of the railway, but also the hard-working majority of those working within it would not have to offer shallow excuses while hiding behind the company mantra.

I'm a driver. It's not down to me to balance the company books. Now go away, you are being a troll. If you have an idea as to how SWT could sort this then let us know. If not then stop complaining and find something better to do as you arnt really adding anything constructive or useful to this thread.

 

[Taunton]

In case you missed it, he has made it very clear that money is an unavoidable issue. It is not going to fall out of the sky.

Now if you have a solution for it, then tell us. If not, then accept it.

Actually money does fall out of the sky for rail operators. In particular, it falls into the booking offices and ticket machines in ever-increasing amounts as more and more people buy tickets for rail travel, as the figures for revenue, and off-peak overcrowding show. What we are discussing here is the attitude that SWT and others are quite happy to take this extra money, and then not do anything to accommodate it, at times when they have resources standing idle and doing nothing.

We have consistently given the solution all along. It is to identify late-evening, Saturday, and other off-peak services which are REGULARLY and KNOWINGLY overcrowded, and extend their formation appropriately with the stock we can all see sat in sidings doing nothing at this time.

 

[A-driver]

Actually money does fall out of the sky for rail operators. In particular, it falls into the booking offices and ticket machines in ever-increasing amounts as more and more people buy tickets for rail travel, as the figures for revenue, and off-peak overcrowding show. What we are discussing here is the attitude that SWT and others are quite happy to take this extra money, and then not do anything to accommodate it.

We have consistently given the solution all along. It is to identify late-evening, Saturday, and other off-peak services which are REGULARLY and KNOWINGLY overcrowded, and extend their formation appropriately with the stock we can all see sat in sidings doing nothing at this time.

But SWT are a business. They are running a railway to make money. That's it, not to serve the community, help people, because they enjoy it but because they are looking to make as much money out of it as possible.

 

[Taunton]

But SWT are a business. They are running a railway to make money. That's it, not to serve the community, help people, because they enjoy it but because they are looking to make as much money out of it as possible.

They're not a real business as SWT. They are a limited-duration franchised operator. They are given an opportunity by the owner of the system, the government, to provide services for a limited period to serve the community and help people, because that is what the owner wanted them to do.

 

[A-driver]

They're not a real business as SWT. They are a limited-duration franchised operator. They are given an opportunity by the owner of the system, the government, to provide services for a limited period to serve the community and help people, because that is what the owner wanted them to do.

And so in the short time that they have the franchise, stagecoach are in it to make every penny they can.

I assure you that stagecoach are in it for the money, not to help the community et.

 

[ainsworth74]

In particular, it falls into the booking offices and ticket machines in ever-increasing amounts as more and more people buy tickets for rail travel, as the figures for revenue, and off-peak overcrowding show. What we are discussing here is the attitude that SWT and others are quite happy to take this extra money, and then not do anything to accommodate it, at times when they have resources standing idle and doing nothing.

Though it's worth bearing in mind that one of the reasons that fares are going up is because the Government are moving towards a policy of the fare payer contributing more towards the costs of the railway than the tax payer. I believe the previous formula was a 50:50 split and we're now moving towards a 75:25 split.

So whilst the money being taken is increasing the money in the industry is probably not changing all that much (at least excluding the coming infrastructure improvements).

 

[jon91]

We have consistently given the solution all along. It is to identify late-evening, Saturday, and other off-peak services which are REGULARLY and KNOWINGLY overcrowded, and extend their formation appropriately with the stock we can all see sat in sidings doing nothing at this time.

Perhaps there is good reason for said stock to be stored there at that time, namely next-day's diagramming and not to mess up the maintenance schedule for the individual units. But hey ho, lets no have practicalities get in the way of a good whinge...

 

[martybabes]

I'm a driver. It's not down to me to balance the company books. Now go away, you are being a troll. If you have an idea as to how SWT could sort this then let us know. If not then stop complaining and find something better to do as you arnt really adding anything constructive or useful to this thread.

I don't think there is any need to be quite so offensive simply because you have a different view to mine. I have tried to be polite and courteous in my comments while faced with significant rudeness. However, like it or not, I em entitled to express a view even if it is different to yours. The only difference is I shall not resort to the actions of the playground bully.

 

[sheff1]

But SWT are a business. They are running a railway to make money. That's it, not to serve the community, help people, because they enjoy it but because they are looking to make as much money out of it as possible.

Which, as has been pointed out, is the reason they don't do it rather than can't do it.

 

[Muzer]

They can't do it because they're a business and they're there to make money. I expect doing things that cost quite a bit and are not likely to get them any additional revenue would be a rather stupid move for any business. I think a better way of putting it is that they can't do it for free, and don't do it because doing it for a cost won't make them any money.

 

[PhilipW]

They can't do it because they're a business and they're there to make money. I expect doing things that cost quite a bit and are not likely to get them any additional revenue would be a rather stupid move for any business. I think a better way of putting it is that they can't do it for free, and don't do it because doing it for a cost won't make them any money.

...... but (as someone else has already pointed out), they are already getting the extra revenue. Instead of getting 5 carriages full of people, they are now getting 7 carriages or so worth of people. It is just that they are keeping it all to themselves instead of spending some of it to benefit their customers.

How much overcrowding does there have to be at 23.00 at night to warrant spending extra on lengthening trains ? -- 8 carriages worth of people, 9, 10 ... I don't know the answer to that. Eventually perpetual overcrowding will put people off. Not much point going for a leisurely night out in London by train if you know you will probably be standing on the way back.

 

[Muzer]

...... but (as someone else has already pointed out), they are already getting the extra revenue. Instead of getting 5 carriages full of people, they are now getting 7 carriages or so worth of people. It is just that they are keeping it all to themselves instead of spending some of it to benefit their customers.

Exactly, they're a company.

How much overcrowding does there have to be at 23.00 at night to warrant spending extra on lengthening trains ? -- 8 carriages worth of people, 9, 10 ... I don't know the answer to that. Eventually perpetual overcrowding will put people off. Not much point going for a leisurely night out in London by train if you know you will probably be standing on the way back.

Enough overcrowding to put people off travelling by train altogether (unlikely IMHO), or enough to come to the DfT's attention to make it a requirement in the next franchise bid, or for wannabe TOCs to put in their own bids and the DfT to award them with it because they feel it to be important.

 

[Flamingo]

The extra revenue from the extra 40-50 passengers will not really be enough to justify the extra costs.

The primary aim of the rail network is getting people to and from work. If a few dozen people are having to stand on their way home from the pub, putting it bluntly, nobody really cares.